Is everything building towards a maximum possible disruption?

The Oprah show today just seems to be another "stick" towards the day that it "breaks the camel's back". By this I mean that we have had many opportunities over the past two years for the pressures building around Y2K to be gradually deflated, but most have been lost.

Oprah could have presented a show with balanced pros and cons and some people would have prepared, and no one would panic. Instead it is a "polly love-in" which means the opportunity to let a little air out of the balloon was lost.

The stock market could have had a series of set backs that would bring valuations closer to historical measures and people might have been more cautious and made Y2K preperations. Instead, the market continues to rise in the face of traditional actions that should have lead to corrections (interest rate increases). This means the greatest number of people have the maximum amount of their investments at risk during the most dangerous possible time in the market, all the while ignoring any Y2K preps.

Politicians have chosen to take maximum political shelter from Y2K fallout rather than take an unpopular stand. Now this may not seem abnormal, but almost every other issue you can think of has at least two sides debating the issue. Here we have near unanimity in the BITR senario, again with the outcome that the greatest possible number of people are unprepared for anything other than a BITR.

The solar maximum seems set to strike with the greatest possible disruptions timed to occur exactly during the peiod of greatest possible Y2K risks (early 2000).

The so called trigger dates in 1999 (like 9/9/99), GPS, JAE, have come and gone with minor disruptions. If there had been a few more problems with the associated media coverage, more people would have been convinced to prepare. But, again, the few problems discredited much of the rest of those saying "prepare for Y2K", again resulting in as few people as possible making preperations.

The above are just a few, I know you can think of other "opportunities lost". So what does all this mean?

Well, it could mean that Y2K IS just going to be a BITR, that we alarmists are wrong, and we just bought some insurance we won't need to use.

Or it could be just one fantastic coincidence that seems to bring all this together.

Or maybe it's just my imagination.

Or maybe it's just the fact that the human mind tends to search for patterns where there may be none.

Or it could be that "just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you".

Answers

It probably means nothing more than the govt. propaganda machine has
succeeded beyond their wildest dreams in putting and keeping the
sheeple fast asleep in their mind-pens. Except for the occasional 4-
1/2 million gal. sewage spill, they have managed to contain and
divert attention away from the real issues and minimize public
involvement in prep. plans.

There have been warnings that Y2K effects would be not be easily
forecast...that it would be different in magnitude, scope and
duration than anyone could imagine. These warnings have applied
primarily to the 'doomer' case so far. In a few short weeks the
'polly' case will be equally tested. Personally, I hope the 'pollys'
are 110% correct...but it's way too soon for them to toot their horns.

This event may well turn out to be more like a roulette wheel when
the '00' comes up (pun intended) and all bets lose! Time will tell.

The Writers, Agents, Managers, Directors, Producers, and Network Execs
have a lot more to do with the success of a TV show than any of the
stars. Oprah Winfrey is an actress. The show was built AROUND her
because she had a familiar face, popular among women and minorities
who spend most of their time at home because they are too stupid to be
employed.

Hawk your last thread was offensive. To suggest that women who stay
home are either minorities, women or both who are not employable
shows a complete lack of taste. I have stayed at home and helped to
take care of a sick baby part of the day when not at work. Work was
more relaxing and less demanding because rarely did I have to be
alert at all times (can't be done with a toddler). There also
appeared to be a slur against minorities suggesting that they were
all not working.

The good ol boy network on the production line seem to keep up with
Jerry Springer instead of Oprah. Personally Oprah is not my cup of
tea but there are worse out there. How many weiner brains watched "So
you want to be a millionare." You might reread your last and think
about who you were talking about and what you might have implied.

I don't think it's government spin, really (although they are
trying.) Instead, it's a combination of spin, and the following:

Most people just can't believe that a stupid little date problem could
crash the economy. Especially not when everything high-tech is being
hyped to the sky.

"common sense" is based on experience, and we have no experience like
this, of a massive, simultaneous, technological failure. People don't
use a logical, step by step process to arrive at decisions. Instead,
they look for patterns -- when they recognize a situation they've seen
before, perhaps they act. That's not going to work here.

There's been a failure of leadership. Not just the spin from the
gov't and industry associations. The doomers took the field last year
and sounded so silly that they discredited the whole Y2K idea. And
professionals who could have made the whole thing credible (like IEEE)
stayed out of the public discussions. So it all became a joke.

Sorry to say squid, but you're the one who implied that, not me. I did
NOT say that ALL women and minorities stay home BECAUSE they are too
stupid to work. I said that Oprah is POPULAR among some women and
minorities who are home because they are too stupid to work. Don't
draw false conclusions from what I said just because someone else may
have said that and you didn't read what I wrote.

Villa Park? It sounds mysterious, but it doesn't ring a bell. Of
course, as I age the bell seems to be ringing a lot less every year.

Paula,

I appreciate your response to let Oprah know my thoughts. I have
watched much of your testemony on CSPAN and read your papers. You
have done an heroic job of trying to bring the problems you see to
light. But, my point in the post is that regardless of what you or I
or anyone is doing, it seems there is a veil in front of the average
person's eyes that PREVENTS them from seeing. I don't want to
get "wierd" on this point, but maybe it's just because of the efforts
I and you and Yourdon and others have made to get through to people
that it seems almost impossible that more people don't Get It.

I'm sure there is a psychological explanation that could make sense
of it. It just seems very odd to me that all the roads taken to Y2K
seem to point to maximizing the disruptions and minimizing the
preperations.

If Oprah is so stupid how come she owns her own production company
worth tens of millions of dollars. If that is stupid give me some of
that stupidity. By the by Oprah is popular among women including
working women I know, in a small survey they seem to agree that she
comes across as someone who could be in their inner circle (sort of
an every women). Hawk if you check with the demigraphics of the
audience that watches Oprah you will find a cross section of socia-
economic groups no just women and minorites who don't want to work.

...popular among women and minorities who spend most of their time
at home because they are too stupid to be employed.

The show is popular among people who are able to view during daytime
hours, for whatever reason (e.g. flexible employment), and among those
who are rich enough to afford VCRs and can view it at their
convenience. The people who are too stupid to be employed gravitate
more toward Jerry Springer.

So, you are suprised that people are unwilling to embrace what could
potentially mean the end of life as they know it? Most folks don't
even think that April 15 ever will arrive. And they can deal with
that. Someone else (mr. w2) has at least helped them prepare for
taxes. Then they think that they are rich 'cause they get a 'refund'!
Really, no one ever wants to verbalize what they imagine will be pain.
It's easier to ignore. Isn't that what commercials teach?